How do we honor an icon when so little truth is known about his life? If Kenneth Branagh’s earnest Shakespearean biopic is any guide, we would do best to stick with the Bard’s own works. Indeed, it’s hard to watch “All Is True” without noticing what’s missing most: the nimble wit and profound insight we’ve already seen in Branagh’s own Shakespearean adaptations.

One can certainly empathize with the director’s desire to dig more deeply, after 35 years of committing the Bard of Avon’s work to stage and screen so successfully. But in the end, this fictionalized biography primarily reminds us how rare its subject’s talents really were.

As depicted by screenwriter Ben Elton, Shakespeare (Branagh) comes home to Stratford in 1613, hoping for a quiet retirement. He has been devastated by a recent fire, which burned his beloved Globe Theatre to the ground. He is mourning the long-ago death of his young son, Hamnet. And he still carries a torch for a lover who clearly isn’t his sharp-tongued wife Anne (Dame Judi Dench).

Dench brings both gravitas and a light twinkle to the illiterate and elderly Anne, a woman who has not been treated kindly by history. Many have assumed that Shakespeare’s only bequest to her — his “second-best bed” — was an insult. But Elton and Dench deftly turn this notion around, drawing out the affection in what must have been, to say the least, a complex relationship.

Judith is also brought to new life in both Elton’s script and Wilder’s spirited performance. Though we know little about the actual Judith, Wilder (primarily a stage actor, like most of the supporting cast) plays her as a complex and brilliant woman undermined by a patriarchy her father implacably upholds. Most curiously, Susanna is portrayed as a meek wife bound to her cruel husband, though in reality she was her father’s favorite, and her epitaph described her as being “witty above her sex.” You may find yourself wishing for another story, in which we could learn something — anything — more interesting about her.

And you’ll definitely want to know more about Shakespeare’s beloved Earl of Southampton (Ian McKellen). His presence amounts to little more than a cameo, but McKellen brings so much playful life to his scene that the film deflates considerably once he’s gone.

But why? Both Elton and Branagh have certainly found great depth and inspiration in Shakespeare before. Elton hasn’t just built his career on irreverence (“The Young Ones,” “Blackadder”), he’s written an entire British sitcom about Shakespeare, called “Upstart Crow.” Even a touch of that show’s lighthearted sauciness would have gone a long way in this effort. Indeed, given that Elton had so few definitive facts to work with, and therefore so much potential to imagine, it’s hard to understand why he chose such a dull and solemn route.

As for Branagh, it’s fair to say that there are few contemporary Shakespearean interpreters more experienced than he is; among his many adaptations are the buoyant and charming “Much Ado About Nothing” and the Oscar-nominated “Henry V” and “Hamlet.”

But now, as both director and star, the enormity of his subject seems more burden than inspiration. Although it’s appropriate to bring some weight to the final years of a great man’s life, there is simply too much of it here: the sets, the cinematography, the costumes all feel heavy, even when the characters release themselves from darkness. It’s hard to say whether Branagh is concerned about getting things wrong, or of being disrespectful. But he never finds the freedom he’s unlocked so often in Shakespeare’s own works. His ambition is honorable, but without substance, it becomes merely the shadow of a dream.

﻿

11 of the Best & Worst Shakespearean Big Screen Adaptations

"Much Ado About Nothing" (1993). Kenneth Branagh beat Whedon to the punch at adapting this comedy and set a pretty decent bar, receiving a warm reception from critics. It had quite the ensemble cast with Branagh, Emma Thompson, Denzel Washington, Keanu Reeves and a young Kate Beckinsale in starring roles.

"Hamlet" (1948). One of the most revered versions of one of Shakespeare's most famous plays. The film is the only straight adaptation to win the Oscar for best picture, and Laurence Olivier is the only man to win best director and best actor for the same film.

"West Side Story" (1961). Shakespeare never wrote a musical, but Leonard Bernstein and Stephen Sondheim added their own touch to the playwright's work with an adaptation of "Romeo and Juliet" that set the action in 1950s New York among rival gangs. The movie won 10 Oscars, including best picture, and is considered one of the greatest American films ever made.

"A Midsummer Night's Dream" (1999). Another star-studded cast made up director Michael Hoffman's version of "A Midsummer Night's Dream," but the members seemed a little mismatched. As New York Times critic Janet Maslin put it, "...Calista Flockhart, hardly fits into the same film with David Strathairn's reserved Duke Theseus, or with Rupert Everett as a slinky Oberon." Reviews were mixed but lent toward positive.

"Romeo and Juliet" (1968). The original incarnation of the classic love story may still be its best adaptation. Franco Zeffirelli directed with Leonard Whiting and Olivia Hussey portraying the star-crossed lovers. It won two Oscars and also received best picture and best director nominations.

"Henry V" (1989). Kenneth Branagh's run of Shakespeare films began with his Oscar-nominated stints as director and star of "Henry V." His "St. Crispin's Day" speech hit all the right notes and is considered one of the best performances of the famous monologue.

"The Tempest" (2010). Director Julie Taymor sparked a lot of interest in her version of the play when she switched the sex of the lead character, Prospero, casting Helen Mirren in a role traditionally played by a man. But the A-list cast could not save this film from being a dud with critics and practically non-existent at the box office.

"Hamlet" (1990). Franco Zeffirelli at it again. This rendition of "Hamlet" starred Mel Gibson as the Danish prince when his acting career was still what made headlines. Kenneth Branagh came out with his own version of the tragedy only six years later, but it's a toss-up for which was the superior adaptation.

"10 Things I Hate About You" (1999). Shakespeare for teenagers. This loose adaptation of "Taming of the Shrew" holds a special place in the hearts of many teens and twentysomethings, thanks in large part to a breakout performance from Heath Ledger and his rendition of "Can't Take My Eyes of You."

"She's the Man" (2006). Before Amanda Bynes was making headlines with her run-ins with the police and court appearances, she gave an adaptation of "Twelfth Night" a shot. Her performance wasn't nearly as interesting as her recent output on twitter has been.

"Romeo + Juliet" (1996). Baz Luhrmann added his signature flair to Shakespeare in this modern adaptation. Definitely over the top, but it gave a unique stamp to the film. Starring a pre-"Titanic" Leonardo DiCaprio, the film is one of the top grossing Shakespeare adaptations to date with nearly $150 million worldwide.

"Shakespeare in Love" (1998). It may not be an actual adaptation of any of Shakespeare's plays, but it contains many elements from them including "Romeo and Juliet" and "Twelfth Night." The best picture winner gave us a look at the young Shakespeare and his inspiration. It may get some flack for beating "Saving Private Ryan" at the Oscars, but few can argue that it's enjoyable.

1 of 13

Which of the famous playwright's works have found box-office and critical glory — and which didn't?